Welcome! Truthbomb Apologetics strives to offer apologetics resources to encourage and challenge both believer and unbeliever.

Saturday, November 16, 2013

Book Review: Killing Jesus - Thoughts for Apologists

“You are about to enter the no-spin zone.” So states Bill O’Reilly at the start of the
O’Reilly Factor airing each evening on the Fox News Channel. Following the success of his previous books Killing Lincoln and Killing Kennedy, he and his co-author Martin Dugard decide to apply
their no-spin, fact based take on the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth in Killing Jesus. They state in the introduction that “…we have
the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but they sometimes appear
contradictory and were written from a spiritual point of view rather than as a
historical chronicling of Jesus’ life.” They
claim to be interested in telling the truth and that this is a fact based book,
not a religious book. They want us to
understand what was going on in the world around Jesus. Rome dominated the world, tolerated no
dissent and “human life was worth little.”

When I first picked the book, I immediately turned to the back to see if the authors cited their sources. And what to my wondering eyes did appear? Recent works by scholars whose names will be
very familiar to students of apologetics and the historic Jesus. The recommended readings from the Sources for the Historical Jesus section
included:

· “A more
theological take on Jesus can be found in C. S. Lewis’s insightful and dense Mere Christianity”

The book is divided into three sections: Book 1, The World of Jesus, Book 2, Behold the Man and Book 3, If You Are the Son of God, Take Yourself Off
This Cross. Readers who may be
squeamish need to be aware that there are some graphic descriptions of the
brutal atrocities and depravity of the cultures at the time. Chapter one describes Herod’s murderous
record and physical ailments as the facts begin with the slaughter of the
children in Bethlehem.

The next two chapters chronicle the rise, warfare, affairs
and assassination of Julius Caesar, who is posthumously deified as Divus Julius,
god Julius, and the Roman civil war that follows which results in the victory
and rise to power of Caesar Augustus.
Following Divus Julius, Augustus affects the title Divi Filius, son of
god. This is an important point to keep
in mind as the the context is set for Jesus' own claims.

The remainder of Book 1 completes the picture, detailing the
rule of Herod Antipas’ and the difficulty of life in Galilee setting the scene
for Jesus and the message he is about to bring.

Book 2, Behold the Man,
is a harmonization of the historical accounts of Jesus’ teachings and ministry
from his entry into the public realm to his preparation to enter
Jerusalem. The authors are quite clear
about who Jesus claims himself to be.
When he goes back to Nazareth and reads from the scroll of Isaiah, he
boldly declares that what he has read refers to himself. He “has issued three pronouncements about his
identity: one to the public in Jerusalem, one to Nicodemus the Pharisee, and
the third in the intimate setting of his own town synagogue…he has declared
himself to be the Son of God”, Divi Filius.

While the majority of the narrative is consistent with the
facts of which we are familiar, there are several moments in the book where I
found myself scratching my head asking, “Where
did they get that fact come from?”
Such moments include the following:

·The message of John the Baptizer is described
as, “Wade into the water and be cleansed of your sins, or this newly anointed
ruler – this ’Christ’ – will punish you in the most horrible manner possible.”

·When Jesus comes to John the Baptist, it is
stated that a dove suddenly lands on his shoulder. The authors exclaim, “the dove changes
everything.” Furthermore, the people who
are present and witness this suddenly “drop to their knees and press their
faces into the earth. Jesus does not
react to this sign of worship. He does
nothing to discourage it, either.” John
then declares when he baptizes Jesus that “this is the Son of God.”

·It is reported that Jesus calls Simon (Peter) a second time. “He knows Jesus from their previous meeting
during the summer, as he and some others were fishing… At the time, Jesus had called upon Simon and
his brother Andrew to join him as he preached his message throughout Galilee
and to save souls by becoming ‘fishers of men.’
While Simon had initially accepted that call to evangelism, he also has
a wife and mother-in-law to care for. The task of being one of Jesus’s
disciples and spreading the word about his message is difficult to balance with
his need to make a living. His
commitment to Jesus has flagged. But now
Jesus is back…”

·The authors claim that, “Whether knowingly or
unknowingly, Jesus has led a life that is a continual fulfillment of Jewish
prophecy…if Jesus chooses to ride into Jerusalem at Passover astride a donkey,
he will be sending a powerful message…Jesus is clever enough to act out any
prophecy…But Jesus would be a fool to ride a donkey into Jerusalem. That would be a death sentence.”

·When Jesus is convicted by the Sanhedrin, “the
verdict is passed by simple consensus. The only voices of dissent come from Nicodemus
and a wealthy Sadducee named Joseph of Arimathea.”

However, there were also a few moments when I found the
authors presenting context and detail that caused me to consider, “That’s an interesting thought”.

·When the authors discuss the Sermon on the Mount,
which they say “may be the most important speech in history,” they also raise
an interesting consideration about the context for the Lord’s Prayer: “It’s all
there. Everything that a peasant in
Galilee can relate to as a part of life under Roman rule: the need to rely on
God, the worry about daily nourishment, the constant struggle to stay out of
debt, and, finally, a reminder that in the midst of this cruel life, succumbing
to the temptations to lie, cheat, steal, or sleep with another man’s wife is a
false act that will only lead people farther and farther from God.”

·When Jesus is addressing the crowd about John
the Baptist, he asks the crowd, “What did you go out into the desert to
see? A reed swayed by the winds? A
man dressed in fine clothes? No, those
who wear fine clothes are in kings’ palaces.”
Why did Jesus mention a reed? A
footnote points out that Herod Antipas’ personal emblem of rule was a reed.
This makes sense in the context of the questions.

·As an apologist, I couldn’t help but smile when
I read, “Jesus is not a prince like Moses or a warrior like David. He is
an intellectual. He deals in logic.”

·The authors also give a tip-of-the-hat to C. S.
Lewis when they state that “to claim he is the Son of God would make Jesus one
of three things: a lunatic, a liar, or a divinity who fulfills Scripture. Few in the crowd believe that Jesus is
deranged or a charlatan. But will they
make that incredible leap to believe that Jesus is God in the flesh?”

·When Jesus calls the Pharisees a brood of vipers,
a footnote points out, “It was a widespread belief at the time that vipers were
hatched inside their mother, then ate their way through her skin to get
out.” From this, it is inferred that
Jesus is essentially calling the religious authorities murderers of their own
parents, a loathsome distinction in Jewish society.

·When Jesus is buried by Nicodemus and Joseph,
the book states that “a criminal’s presence in a tomb desecrates it…for a
member of the Sanhedrin to touch a dead body on Passover makes him unclean and
disqualifies him from eating the Seder.
By law, Joseph and Nicodemus will be declared impure and must undergo a
seven-day cleansing ritual.”

As Jesus prepares to enter Jerusalem at the close of Book 2,
it is clear that the disciples think he will one day rule the land, but he
tells them he will be killed and raised on the third day. They have no idea what this means.

Book 3, If You Are the
Son of God, Take Yourself off This Cross, gives the account of the events
of Passover week that end ultimately in his crucifixion. “He has been very specific with the disciples
that he is more than just an earthly Christ.
They don’t understand. He has
told them again and again that he is a divine being, the Son of God. They cannot comprehend that concept. Jesus has made it clear that he is the Christ
but that his kingdom is not of this world.
They don’t understand what he’s talking about. Three times, Jesus has told his disciples
that he will die this week. But his
followers refuse even to contemplate that.”

Then, Judas makes his deal with the high priests. The
authors seem to believe that Judas thinks that “Jesus will be arrested and then
declare himself to be the Christ. If the
Nazarene truly is the Messiah, then he will have no problem saving himself from
Caiaphas and the high priests. However,
if Jesus is not the Christ, he will die.”

Finally, he is executed and “…Jesus is clearly dead. The spear rupturing the pericardial sac around
his heart left no doubt.”

So what do we make of this “fact” based account of the life
and death of Jesus of Nazareth? It is well-researched,
but it is by no means a scholarly product.
The absence of citations within the text will be frustrating for those
readers interested in digging deeper and verifying certain “facts”.

However, the author’s purpose was to write a novelized account
to a popular level audience. It seeks to
harmonize the historical evidence of the four gospel accounts while using broad
brush strokes to paint a picture of the ragged and often brutal life in first
century Palestine under Roman rule. In
this respect, I think the authors are successful, describing Jesus’ life and
teachings in the context of the world at that time. I found it an enjoyable read with the
narrative progressing at a quick pace. Though
the authors expressed that it was not their intention for the book to be a
religious treatise, I found some of what I read causing me to think a little
deeper about my understanding of Jesus life and teachings.

Apologetically, the authors are clear about why Jesus didn’t
make his proclamations openly and publicly that he is the Jewish Messiah, the
Son of God. To do so would have resulted
in immediate execution by either the Jews for blasphemy or the Romans for
treason. The authors are also clear that Jesus
did make such claims both implicitly
and explicitly. He clearly understood
that his mission was not to establish a new kingdom for Israel, free from the
oppression of Rome and its puppet potentates.
His purpose was to teach the truth about God in a world crushed by
brutal and debauched men of power. To this
the religious leaders were blinded by their self-righteous pride. He rode into Jerusalem, in complete control of
his faculties and allowed himself to be humiliated and killed.

In conclusion, Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be the Son of
God in a culture in which it was blasphemy, in an empire in which it was treason. For this he was executed and buried in the
tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. But Mary
Magdalene and some of the other women found the tomb empty and “[to] this day,
the body of Jesus of Nazareth has never been found.” These are the facts. This is the evidence. Presented to the reader “fair and balanced.” “We report, you decide.” Let the conversations begin.